Forum Index            

Cookies Consent Information
SelectSmart.com®
Before you decide
Over 20,000 selectors

Join to post comments.
Share
Try These Selectors:
Best college values

Good jobs in gig economy

Right religion for you

Presidential candidates

Best US city for you

Know your philosophy

Landmark decisions
Is your name welcomed below? Then you can post here. Otherwise, click "Log In" to post!
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

The day the sun danced in the sky.

Posted by Dick 
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 02:50AM
Quote
tuk22
Again if metaphysics is trivial be consistent and stop claiming we live in a world absent of God

What leads you to believe I'm making a metaphysical claim?
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 03:07AM
Good question. You make a metaphysical claim every time you say that it's improbable that God exists. That statement implies you know how the world actually is and further implies a different atheistic metaphysical concept. You are far from just stating "you are without belief in God". You assume to hold special knowledge of the foundation of the universe.

It can be tricky if you have a very particular God concept stuck in your head that you can't shake.

What is God at it's basic understanding? An eternal foundational being that accounts for the universe. A higher power. An unspecified 'something' that is foundational to law, both logical and physical, and material reality.
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 03:58AM
What is the difference between something that can have no qualities which make it detectable and something that does not exist? No diff. The godthing has no qualities which make it detectable, therefore, it probably does not exist. In fact, it is impossible for it to exist because existent things by definition have detectable qualities.

Nobody cares about theology except believers who need to find a way to justify their belief in improbable/impossible beings.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 05:38AM
We have observed only 4% of the universe... Aliens, dark matter, gravitons... All undetectable.

You can't have something be impossible and improbable...

And I think it's obvious people are interested in Theology...
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 06:34AM
[hubblesite.org]

Aliens, dark matter and gravitons, ohmy! Some may not have been detected yet, true, but they still have qualities that are detectable and the probabilities for their existence is much higher than zero if you can follow the math. Name one quality of godthing that might be detectable. Warm fuzzy feelings when you're on your knees beside your bed don't count.

[lovegod.wordpress.com]

Oh, these types do love their possible realities where godthings are crammed into real science. Makes me lmao...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/15/2015 07:22AM by Sam.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 08:44AM
String theory and multiple universes... Sam what does it feel like to be so wrong so often? Not warm and fuzzy I bet... Bitter and flustered?

What's the probability that multiple universes exist? 42.7%?
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 03:53PM
Since you didn't address what I posted, I'm guessing it is you who is bitter and flustered, lol. I bet you talk to the godthing, don't you? Don't lie. hehe
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 06:10PM
Re: "What is God at it's basic understanding? An eternal foundational being that accounts for the universe. A higher power. An unspecified 'something' that is foundational to law, both logical and physical, and material reality."

Why should anyone EVER believe this godthing even POSSIBLY exists?
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 08:11PM
20% chance we're all sims.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 10:18PM
Ugh you can't even see when you contradict yourself. It's like you are googling random atheist responses from the internet and copy/pasting whatever you think is relevant...
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 15, 2015 10:36PM
Sometimes a puddle looks deep... sometimes it doesn't. eye rolling smiley
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 02:21AM
Quote
Sam Wrote:
Why should anyone EVER believe this godthing even POSSIBLY exists?

Because it is, strictly speaking, logically possible. However, as far as I can tell, none of us agnostics here think the believers "should" believe in the actual existence of a god (we think the question is underdetermined). So, if you're seriously wondering why some people do indeed believe in the existence of some kind of god, you'd have to locate a believer and ask that person why he or she believes, whatever he or she understands to be God, actually 'exists'. What we're discussing is the belief the hard atheists here hold in the nonexistence of any kind of god, and why they believe we, the agnostics, "should" believe the same things they do. Those who believe that some kind of god exists, and those who believe that a god of any kind certainly does not exist, both look at the evidence for and against, but they come to different conclusions with regard to their respective beliefs.

My guess, as an agnostic, is that their respective beliefs are arrived at by way of their preconceived beliefs, the use of rationalization when it comes to examining the evidence, and it is all colored by their emotions.

Keep in mind, man is not the rational animal, but the animal who rationalizes! smileys with beer
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 06:08AM
Don't I know it! For the record, I'm probably the only "hard" atheist here who feels as certain that gods are nonexistent as I do that fairies are nonexistent. At least fairies have imaginary qualities that we know do exist in other creatures (don't we?) so it's much more likely they exist yet we all know they don't. I'm not all about the philosophical implications of my beliefs. My belief and claim of knowledge is supported by the evidence I believe supports it. You yourself said the Fatima thing reported by kids was evidence that the virginthing exists, the other village thinks it's evidence of flying teapots and I think it's evidence some indoctrinated people had a hive reaction to one programmed child who spread it to the others. See how silly it is to say there is evidence for godthings using anecdotal things like that? Let's just be practical.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 06:39PM
Sam wrote: For the record, I'm probably the only "hard" atheist here who feels as certain that gods are nonexistent as I do that fairies are nonexistent.

No. I'm right there with you. There is no more reason to believe that any god so far proposed in any religion exists than there is reason to believe that elves or fairies or sea monsters or the like exist and, to be honest, probably less reason.

Some gods have definitions that are either incoherent (Tuk's seems to be of this variety) or self-contradictory so we know beyond question that those gods do not exist because they cannot exist.
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 06:45PM
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 08:51PM
Quote
Sam Wrote:
You yourself said the Fatima thing reported by kids was evidence that the virginthing exists, the other village thinks it's evidence of flying teapots and I think it's evidence some indoctrinated people had a hive reaction to one programmed child who spread it to the others. See how silly it is to say there is evidence for godthings using anecdotal things like that? Let's just be practical.

It could be both. As you noted, however, I was using the event as just one single example to demonstrate the existence of evidence (do you want more examples ?) supporting the existence of a "godthing", not proof that a "godthing' exists. Our argument is not over the existence or non existence of a "godthing", its about the existence or nonexistence of evidence. The evidence I provided is something you have been denying exists, "zero evidence" was your term. Eyewitness testimony is evidence. However, the believability of eyewitness testimony, that is, how persuasive that evidence will be can vary from person to person depending on many factors (confirmation bias can play a big part). But we're not arguing over how compelling, persuasive, or reliable it is. We're arguing over the very existence of the evidence itself. It clearly exists. Virtually any evidence can be used as evidence for more than one thing, even opposite things. For example, a healthy person who enjoys physical activity and exercising can use statistics as evidence to support his belief that people who exercise are healthier than people who don't. The statistics would be evidence supporting his claim. A healthy person who does not enjoy or engage in a great deal of physical activity, and doesn't want to start exercising, might say the statistics are evidence demonstrating only that healthy people are more likely to exercise than sick and unhealthy people, and that's what accounts for the higher health/exercise numbers, and furthermore the statistics show that there are a large number of people as well who don't exercise but are healthy. That would be using the same statistics as evidence to support his claim.. At OJ's trial, evidence was provided supporting his guilt and evidence was provided supporting his innocence. Whether he killed his wife or not, "evidence" supporting their claim was provided from each side.
Sam
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 09:35PM
Isle, Re: "Virtually any evidence can be used as evidence for more than one thing, even opposite things."

This definition of evidence renders it meaningless. There is a difference between USING something as evidence and identifying evidence that reliably favors one explanation over another.

Re: "But we're not arguing over how compelling, persuasive, or reliable it is. We're arguing over the very existence of the evidence itself. It clearly exists."

Evidence exists. I agree that's a stand alone true statement. Does evidence exist in favor of godthings being the most likely explanation for Fatima or anything else? Nope.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 11:00PM
Some gods have definitions that are either incoherent (Tuk's seems to be of this variety)

Liar. You understand perfectly and that is why you struggle to maintain your belief that you have a rational stance.

What do you two have besides fuzzy math and silly absence of evidence ideas? Nothing. It's all posturing.
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 11:27PM
Quote
tuk22
Some gods have definitions that are either incoherent (Tuk's seems to be of this variety)

Liar. You understand perfectly and that is why you struggle to maintain your belief that you have a rational stance.

What do you two have besides fuzzy math and silly absence of evidence ideas? Nothing. It's all posturing.

I'm sorry, tuk. What exactly, again, briefly and coherently if at all possible, is your definition of "God"?
Re: The day the sun danced in the sky.
February 17, 2015 11:33PM
It's on this very page... That and over a year ago we spent a month arguing why God is the simplest metaphysical explanation to account for all reality... It seems strange you are now pretending you can't comprehend something so basic when last year you had no issues
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login


This forum powered by Phorum

Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!